Skip to main content

Full text of "The truth about "The Protocols" : a literary forgery"

See other formats

; Vf 

fhe Truth About 
u The Protocols" 


From he Ctmes 






The Truth About 
"The Protocols" 


From Cfje Cimeg of 

August 16, 17, and 18, 1921 



The so-called " Protocols of the Elders of 
Sion " were published in London in 1920 
under the title of " The Jewish Peril." 

This book is a translation of a book pub- 
lished in Russia, in 1905, by Sergei Nilus, 
a Government official, who professed to have 
received from a friend a copy of a summary 
of the minutes of a secret meeting, held in 
Paris by a Jewish organization that was 
plotting to overthrow civilization in order to 
establish a Jewish world state. 

These " Protocols " attracted little atten- 
tion until after the Russian Revolution of 
1917, when the appearance of the Bolshevists, 
among whom were many Jews professing 
and practising political doctrines that in 
some points resembled those advocated in 
the " Protocols," led many to believe that 
Nilus's alleged discovery was genuine. The 
" Protocols " were widely discussed and 
translated into several European languages. 
Their authenticity has been frequently at- 
tacked and many arguments have been 
adduced for the theory that they are a forgery. 

In the following three articles the Con- 
stantinople Correspondent of The Times 
presents for the first time conclusive proof 
that the document is in the main a clumsy 
plagiarism. He has forwarded to The Times 
a copy of the French book from which the 


plagiarism is made. The British Museum 
has a complete copy of the book, which is 
entitled " Dialogue aux Enfers entre Machi- 
avel et Montesquieu, ou la Politique de 
Machiavel au XIX. Siecle. Par un Con- 
temporain," and was pubh'shed at Brussels 
in 1865. Shortly after its publication the 
author, Maurice Joly, a Paris lawyer and 
publicist, was arrested by the police of 
Napoleon III. and sentenced to 15 months' 


" There is one thing about Constantinople 
that is worth your while to remember," said a 
diplomatist to the writer in 1908. " If you 
only stay here long enough you will meet 
many men who matter, and you may find the 
key to many strange secrets." Yet I must 
confess that when the discovery which is the 
theme of these articles was communicated to 
me I was at first incredulous. Mr. X., who 
brought me the evidence, was convinced. 
"Read this book through, 1 ' he said, "and 
you will find irrefutable proof that the ' Pro- 
tocols of the Learned Elders of Sion ' is a 

Mr. X., who does not wish his real name to be 
known, is a Russian landowner with English 
connexions. Orthodox by religion, he is in 
political opinion a Constitutional Monarchist. 
He came here as a refugee after the final failure 
of the White cause in South Russia. He had 
long been interested in the Jewish question as 
far as it concerned Russia, had studied the 
" Protocols," and during the period of Denikin's 
ascendancy had made investigations with the 
object of discovering whether any occult 
*' Masonic " organization, such as the " Proto- 
cols " speak of, existed in Southern Russia. The 
only such organization was a Monarchist one. 
The discovery of the key to the problem of the 
" Protocols " came to him by chance. 

A few months ago he bought a number of old 
books from a former officer of the " Okhrana " 
(Political Police) who had fled to Constantinople. 
Among these books was a small volume in 
French, lacking the title-page, with dimensions 
of 5 Jin. by 3 fin. It had been cheaply re- 
bound. On the leather back is printed in 

Latin capitals the word Joli. The preface, 
entitled " Simple avertissement," is dated 
Geneva, October 15, 1864. The book contains 
324 pages, of which numbers 315-322 inclusive 
follow page 24 in the only copy known to Mr. 
X, perhaps owing to a mistake when the book 
was rebound. Both the paper and the type 
are characteristic of the " sixties and seventies " 
of the last century. These details are given in 
the hope that they may lead to the discovery 
of the title of the book [See Preface]. Mr. X. 
believes it must be rare, since, had it not 
been so, the " Protocols " would have speedily 
been recognized as a plagiarism by anyone 
who had read the original. 

That the latter is a " fake " could not be 
maintained for an instant by anyone who had 
seen it. Its original possessor, the old Okhrana 
officer, did not remember where he obtained it, 
and attached no importance to it. Mr. X, 
glancing at it one day, was struck by a re- 
semblance between a passage which had caught 
his eye and a phrase in the French edition of 
the " Protocols " (Edition de la Vieillo France, 
1920, 6, Rue du Preaux-Clercs, 5, Paris 7th 
Arrondissement). He followed up the clue, and 
soon realized that the " Protocols " were to a 
very large extent as much a paraphrase of the 
Geneva original as the published version of a 
War Office or Foreign Office telegram is a para- 
phrase of the ciphered original. 

Before receiving the book from Mr. X, I was, 
as I have said, incredulous. I did not believe 
that Sergei Nilus's " Protocols " were authentic ; 
they explained too much by the theory of a 
vast Jewish conspiracy. Professor Nilus's 
account of how they were obtained was too 
melodramatic to be credible, and it was hard to 
believe that real " Learned Elders of Sion " 
would not have produced a more intelligent 
political scheme than the crude and theatrical 
subtilties of the Protocols. But I could not 

have believed, had I not seon, that the writsr 
who supplied Nilus with his originals was a 
careless and shameless plagiarist. 

The Geneva book is a very thinly-veiled 
attack on the despotism of Napoleon III. in 
the form of a series of 25 dialogues divided into 
four parts. The speakers are Montesquieu 
and Machiavelli. In the brief preface to his 
book the anonymous author points out that 
it contains passages which are applicable to 
all Governments, " but it particularly personi- 
fies a political system which has not varied in 
its application for a single day since the fatal 
and alas ! too distant date when it was 
enthroned." Its references to the " Hauss- 
mannisation " of Paris, to the repressive 
measures and policy of the French Emperor, to 
his wasteful financial system, to his foreign wars, 
fro his use of secret societies in his foreign policy 
(cf., his notorious relations with the Carbonari) 
and his suppression of them in France, to his 
relations with the Vatican, and to his control 
of the Press are unmistakable. 

The Geneva book, or as it will henceforth be 
called the Geneva Dialogues, opens with the 
meeting of the spirits of Montesquieu and 
Machiavelli on a desolate beach in the world 
of shades. After a lengthy exchange of 
civilities Montesquieu asks Machiavelli to 
explain why from an ardent Republican he 
had become the author of " The Prince " and 
'' the founder of that sombre school of thought 
which has made all crowned heads your dis- 
ciples, but which is well fitted to justify the 
worst crimes of tyranny." Machiavelli replies 
that he is a realist and proceeds to justify the 
teaching of " The Prince," and to explain its 
applicability to the Western European States 
of 1864. 

In the first six " Geneva Dialogues " Montes- 
quieu is given a chance of argument of which 
he avails himself. In the seventh dialogue, 


which corresponds to the fifth, sixth, seventh, 
and part of the eighth " Protocols," he gives 
Machiavelli permission to describe at length 
how he would solve the problem of stabilizing 
political societies " incessantly disturbed by 
the spirit of anarchy and revolution." Hence- 
forth Machiavelli or in reality Napoleon III., 
speaking through Machiavelli, has the lion's 
share of the dialogue. Montesquieu's contri- 
butions thereto become more and more 
exclamatory ; he is profoundly shocked by 
Machiavelli-Napoleon's defence of an able and 
ruthless dictatorship, but his counter-arguments 
grow briefer and weaker. At times, indeed, 
the author of " L' Esprit des Lois " is made to 
cut as poor a figure as parvum componere 
magno does Dr. Watson when he attempts to 
talk criminology to Sherlock Holmes. 

The " Protocols " follow almost the same 
order as the Dialogues. Dialogues 1-17 gene- 
rally correspond with " Protocols " 1-19. There 
are a few exceptions to this. One is in the 18th 
" Protocol," where, together with paraphrases 
of passages from the 17th Dialogue (" Geneva 
Dialogues," pp. 216, 217), there is an echo of 
a passage in the 25th " Geneva Dialogue," viz. : 
" Quand le malheureux est opprim6 il dit 
* Si le Roi le savait ' ; Quand on veut se 
venger, qu'on espere un secours, on dit ' le 
Roi le saura.' ' This appears on page 68 of 
the English edition of the " Protocols " (4th 
Edition, published by "The Britons," 62, 
Oxford-street, London, W.) as " In order to 
exist, the prestige of power must occupy such 
a position that the people can say among them- 
selves, ' If only the King knew about it,' or 
' When the King knows about it.' " 

The last five " Protocols " (Nos. 20-24 in- 
clusive) do not contain so many paraphrases 
of the " Geneva Dialogues " as the first 19. 
Some of their resemblances and paraphrases 
are, however, very striking, e.g., the following : 

A loan is an issue of Government paper which en- 
tails an obligation to pay interest amounting to a 
percentage of the total sum of the borrowed money. 
If a loan is at 5 per cent., then in 20 years the Govern- 
ment will have unnecessarily paid out a sum equal 
to that of the loan in order to cover the percentage. 
In 40 years it will have paid twice, and in 60 thrice 
that amount, but the loan will still remain as an 
unpaid debt. " Protocols," p. 77. 

MONTESQUIEU. " How are loans made ? By the 
issue of bonds entailing on the Government the 
obligation to pay interest proportionate to the 
capital it has been paid. Thus, if a loan is at 5 per 
cent., the State, after 20 years, has paid out a sum 
equal to the borrowed capital. When 40 years 
have expired it has paid double, after 60 years triple : 
yet it remains debtor for the entire capital sum. 
" Geneva Dialogues," p. 250. 

But generally speaking " Protocols " 20 
and 21, which deal (somewhat unconvincingly) 
with the financial programme of the Learned 
Elders, owe less to the " Geneva Dialogues," 
Nos. 18-21, than to the imagination of the 
plagiarist author who had for once in a way 
to show a little originality. This is natural 
enough since the "Dialogues" in question 
describe the actual financial policy of the 
French Imperial Government, while the " Pro- 
tocols " deal with the future. Again in the 
last four " Geneva Dialogues " Machiavelli's 
apotheosis of the Second Empire, being based 
upon historical facts which took place between 
1852 and 1864, obviously furnished scanty 
material for the plagiarist who wished to prove 
or, very possibly, had been ordered to prove 
in the " Protocols " that the ultimate aim 
of the leaders of Jewry was to give the world 
a ruler sprung from the House of David. 

The scores of parallels between the two books 
and a theory concerning the methods of the 
plagiarist and the reasons for the publication 
of the " Protocols " in 1905 will be the subject 
of further articles. Meanwhile it is amusing 
to find that the culy subject with which the 
" Protocols " deal on lines quite contrary 
to those followed by Machiavelli in the " Dia- 
logues" is the private life of the Sovereign. 


The last words of the " Protocols " are " Our 
Sovereign must be irreproachable." The Elders 
evidently propose to keep the King of Israel 
in good order. The historical Machiavelli 
was, we know, rather a scandalous old gentle- 
man, and his shade insists that amorous adven- 
tures, so far from injuring a Sovereign's reputa- 
tion, make him an object of interest and 
sympathy to " the fairest half of his subjects." 



While the Geneva Dialogues open with an 
exchange of compliments between Montesquieu 
and Machiavelli, which covers seven pages, the 
author of the Protocols plunges at once in 
medias res. 

One can imagine him hastily turning over 
those first seven pages of the book which he has 
been ordered to paraphrase against time, and 
angrily ejaculating, " Nothing here." But on 
page 8 of the Dialogues he finds what he wants ; 
the greater part of this page and the next aro 
promptly paraphrased, thus : 
Geneva Dialogues, p. 8. Protocols, p. 1 (" The 

Among mankind the 
evil instinct is mightier 
than the good. Man is 
more drawn to evil than 
to good. Pear and Force 
have more empire over 
him than reason. 

Britons " edition). 
It must be noted that 
people with corrupt in- 
stincts are more numerous 
than those of noble in- 
stinct. Therefore in gov- 
erning the world the best 

Every man aims at domin- results are obtained by 

ation ; not one but would 
be an oppressor if ho 
could ; all or almost all 
are ready to sacrifice the 

means of violence and in- 
timidation, and not by 
acad emic discussions. 
Every man aims at power ; 

rights of others to their every one would like to be- 
own interests. . . . come a dictator if he only 
could do so, and rare in- 
deed are the men who 
. would not be disposed to 

sacrifice the welfare of 
others in order to attain 
their own personal aims, 
restrains those What restrained the 


beasts of prey which they wild beasts of prey which 
call men from attacking we call men ? What has 
ruled them up to now V 
In the first stages of social 
life they submitted to 
brute and blind force, then 
to law, which in reality is 
the same force, only 
masked. Prom this I am 

one another ? Brute un- 
restrained Force in the 
first stages of social life, 
then the Law, that is still 
force regulated by forms. 
You have consulted all 
historic ;il sources ; every- 
where might precedes 

led to deduct that by the 

right. Political Liberty is law of nature right lies 
merely a relative idea. ... in might. Political freo- 

doni is not a fact but an 



The gift of liberty according to the Machia- 
velli of the Geneva Dialogues, of self-government 
according to the Protocols (page 2), leads 
speedily to civil and social strife, and the State 
is soon ruined by internal convulsions or by 
foreign intervention following on the heels of 
civil war. Then follows a singular parallel 
between the two books which deserves quota- 
tion : 

Geneva Dialogues, p. 9. Protocols, p. 2. 

What arms will they ... I would ask tha 
(States) employ in war question why is it not im- 
against foreign enemies ? moral for a State which 
Will the opposing generals has two enemies, one ex- 
communicate their plans ternal and one internal, 
of campaign to one another to use different means of 
and thus be mutually in defence against the former 
a position to defend them- to that which it would use 
selves ? Will they mutu- against the latter, to make 
ally ban night attacks, secret plans of defence, to 
traps, ambushes, battles attack him by night or 
with inequality of force ? with superior forces ? . . . 
Of course not ; such com- 
batants would court de- 
rision. Are you against 
the employment of these 
traps and tricks, of all the 
strategy indispensable to 
war against the enemy 
within, the revolutionary ? 

Both " Machiavelli " and the author of the 
Protocols agree (Prot. p. 3, Geneva Dialogues, 
p. 11) almost in the same words that politics 
have nothing in common with morality. Right 
is described in the Protocols as "an abstract 
idea established by nothing," in the Dialogues 
as an " infinitely vague " expression. The end, 
say both, justifies the means. " I pay less 
attention," says Machiavelli, " to what is 
good and moral than to what is useful and 
necessary." The Protocols (p. 4) use the same 
formula, substituting " profitable " for " use- 
ful." According to the Protocols he who would 
rule " must have recourse to cunningness (sic) 
and hypocrisy." In the second Dialogue (p. 
15) Montesquieu reproaches Machiavelli for 
having " only two words to repeat 'Force ' and 
' guile.' " Both Machiavelli and the " Elders " 


of the Protocols preach despotism as the solo 
safeguard against anarchy. In the Protocols 
this despotism has to be Jewish and here- 
ditary. Machiavelli's despotism is obviously 

There are scores of other parallels between 
the books. Fully 50 paragraphs in the Pro- 
tocols are simply paraphrases of passages in 
the Dialogues. The quotation per me reges 
regnant, rightly given in the Vieille France 
edition of the Protocols (p. 29), while regunt 
is substituted for regnant in the English version 
(p. 20), appears on p. 63 of the Geneva Dialogues. 
Sulla, whom the English version of the Pro- 
tocols insists on calling " Silla," appears in 
both books. 

After covering Italy with blood, Sulla reappeared 
as a simple citizen in Borne : no one durst touch a 
hair of his head. Geneva Dialogues, p. 159. 

Remember at the time when Italy was streaming 
with blood, she did not touch a hair of Silla's head, 
and he was the man who made her blood pour out. 
Protocols, p. 51. 

Sulla, who after the proscriptions stalked 
" in savage grandeur home," is one of the 
tyrants whom every schoolboy knows and those 
who believe that Elders of the 33rd Degree are 
responsible for the Protocols, may say that this 
is a mere coincidence. But what about the 
exotic Vishnu, the hundred-armed Hindu deity 
who appears twice in each book ? The following 
passages never were examples of " unconscious 

Geneva Dialogues, p. 141 : 

Machiavelli. " Like the God Vishnu, my press 
will have a hundred arms, and these arms will give 
their hands to all the different shades of opinion 
throughout the country." 

Protocols, p. 43 : 

" These newspapers, like the Indian god Vishnu, 
will be possessed of hundreds of hands, each of 
which will be feeling the pulse of varying public 

Geneva Dialogues, p. 207 : 
Montesquieu. " Now I understand the figure 
of the god Vishnu ; you have a hundred 


arms like the Indian idol, and each of your fingers 
touches a spring." 

Protocols, p. 65 : 

" Our Government will resemble the Hindu god 
Vishnu. Each of our hundred hands will hold one 
spring of the social machinery of State." 


The Dialogues and the Protocols alike 
devote special attention to the Press, and their 
schemes for the muzzling and control thereof 
are almost identical absolutely identical, 
indeed, in many details. Thus Machiavelli on 
pp. 135 and 136 of the Dialogues expounds the 
following ingenious scheme : 

" I shall extend the tax on newspapers to books, 
or rather I shall introduce a stamp duty on books 
having less than a certain number of pages. A book, 
for example, with less than 200 or 300 pages will not 
rank as a book, but as a brochure. I am sure you see 
the advantage of this scheme. On the one hand 
I thin (je rarifie) by taxation that cloud of short 
books which are the mere appendages of journalism ; 
on the other I force those who wish to escape stamp 
duty to throw themselves into long and costly 
compositions, which will hardly ever be sold and 
scarcely read in such a form." 

The Protocols, p. 41, has : 

" We will tax it (the book press) in the same 
manner as the newspaper Press that is to say, by 
means of Excise stamps and deposits. But on 
books of less than 300 pages we will place a tax twice 
as heavy. These short books we will classify as 
pamphlets, which constitute the most virulent form 
of printed poison. These measures will also compel 
writers to publish such long works that they will 
be little read by the public and so chiefly on account 
of their high price." 

Both have the same profound contempt 
for journalists. 

Geneva Dialogues, pp. 145, 146 : 
Machiavelli. " You must know that journalism 
is a sort of Freemasonry ; those who live by it are 
bound ... to one another by the ties of pro- 
fessional discretion ; like the augurs of old, they 
do not lightly divulge the secret of their oracles. They 
would gain nothing by betraying themselves, for they 
have mostly won more or less discreditable scars ..." 

Protocols, p. 44 : 

" Already there exists in French journalism a 
system of Masonic understanding for giving counter- 


signs. All organs of the Press are tied by mutual pro- 
fessional secrets in the manner of the ancient oracles. 
Not one of its members will betray his knowledge of 
the secret, if the secret has not been ordered to be 
made public. No single publisher will have the 
courage to betray the secret entrusted to him, the 
reason being that not one of them is admitted into 
the literary world without bearing the marks of some 
shady act in his past life." 

But this contempt is nothing compared 
to that which both Machiavelli and the Elders 
evince towards the masses whom tyranny is 
to reduce to a more than Oriental servitude. 

Geneva Dialogues, p. 43 : 

Machiavelli. " You do not know the unbounded 
meanness of the peoples .... grovelling before 
force, pitiless towards the weak, implacable to faults, 
indulgent to crimes, incapable of supporting the 
contradictions of a free regime, and patient to the 
point of martyrdom under the violence of an audacious 
despotism . . . giving themselves masters whom 
they pardon for deeds for the least of which they 
would have beheaded twenty constitutional kings." 

Protocols, p. 15 : 

" In their intense meanness the Christian peoples 
help our independence when kneeling they crouch 
before power ; when they are pitiless towards the 
weak ; merciless in dealing with faults, and lenient to 
crimes ; when they refuse to recognize the contra- 
dictions of freedom ; when they are patient to the 
degree of martyrdom in bearing with the violence of 
an audacious despotism. At the hands of their 
present dictators, Premiers, and Ministers, they 
endure abuses for the smallest of which they would 
have murdered twenty kings." 

Both the Elders and Machiavelli propose 
to make political crime thoroughly unpopular 
by assimilating the treatment of the political 
criminal to that of the felon. Both devote not 
a little attention to police organization and 
espionage ; the creator of Machiavelli had 
evidently studied Napoleon III.'s police methods 
and suffered at the hands of his agents. Each 
proposes to exercise a severe control over the 
Bar and the Bench. As regards the Vatican, 
Machiavelli-Napoleon, with recent Italian his- 
tory in mind, aims at the complete control of 
the Papacy. After inflaming popular hatred 


against the Church of Rome arid its clergy, he 
will intervene to protect the Holy See, as 
Napoleon III. did intervene, when " the 
chassepots worked wonders.'* The learned 
Elders propose to follow a similar plan : " when 
the people in their rage throw themselves on 
to the Vatican we shall appear as its protectors 
in order to stop bloodshed." Ultimately, of 
course, they mean to destroy the Church. 
The terrible chiefs of a Pan-Judaic conspiracy 
could hardly have any other plan of campaign. 
Machiavelli, naturally, does not go so far. 
Enough for him if the Pope is safely lodged in 
the Napoleonic pocket. 

Is it necessary to produce further proofs 
that the majority of the Protocols are simply 
paraphrases of the Geneva Dialogues, with 
wicked Hebrew Elders, and finally an Israelite 
world ruler in the place of Machiavelli-Napoleon 
III., and the brutish goyim (Gentiles) sub- 
stituted for the fickle masses, " gripped in a 
vice by poverty, ridden by sensuality, devoured 
by ambition," whom Machiavelli intends to 
win ? 



There is no evidence as to how the Geneva 
Dialogues reached Russia. The following theory 
may be suggested. 

The Third Napoleon's secret police, many of 
whom were Corsicans, must have known the 
existence of the Dialogues and almost cer- 
tainly obtained them from some of the 
many persons arrested on the charge of political 
conspiracy during the reign of Napoleon III. 
In the last two decades of the 19th century 
and in the early years of the 20th there 
were always a few Corsicans in the Palace 
Police of the Tsar, and in the Russian secret 
service. Combining courage with secretiveness, 
a high average of intelligence with fidelity to 
his chief, the Corsican makes a first-class secret 
agent or bodyguard. It is not improbable that 
Corsicans who had been in the service of 
Napoleon III., or who had had kinsmen in his 
secret service, brought the Geneva Dialogues 
to Russia, where some member of the Okhrana 
or some Court official obtained possession 
of them. But this is only a theory. 

As to the Protocols, they were first pub- 
lished in 1905 at Tsarskoye Selo in the second 
edition of a book entitled " The Great Within 
the Small," the author of which was Professor 
Sergei Nilus. Professor Nilus has been described 
to the writer as a learned, pious, credulous 
Conservative, who combined much theolo- 
gical and some historical erudition with a 
singular lack of knowledge of the world. In 
January, 1917, Nilus, according to the intro- 
duction to the French version of the Protocols, 
published a book, entitled "It is Here, at Our 
Doors ! ! " in which he republished the Pro- 
tocols. In this latter work, according to the 


French version, Professor Nilus stated that the 
manuscript of the Protocols was given him by 
Alexis Nicolaievich Sukhotin, a noble who 
afterwards became Vice-Governor of Stavropol. 

According to the 1905 edition of the Pro- 
tocols they were obtained by a woman who 
stole them from " one of the most influential 
and most highly initiated leaders of Free- 
masonry. The theft was accomplished at the 
close of the secret meeting of the ' initiated ' in 
France, that nest of Jewish conspiracy." But 
in the epilogue to the English version of the 
Protocols Professor Nilus says, " My friend 
found them in the safes at the headquarters 
of the Society of Zion which are at present 
situated in France." According to the French 
version of the Protocols, Nilus in his book of 
1917 states that the Protocols were notes of a 
plan submitted to the " Council of Elders " by 
Theodor Hertzl at the first Zionist Congress 
which was held at Basle, in August, 1897, and 
that Hertzl afterwards complained to the 
Zionist Committee of Action of the indiscreet 
publication of confidential information. The 
Protocols were signed by " Zionist representa- 
tives of the 33rd Degree " in Orient Free- 
masonry and were secretly removed from the 
complete file of the proceedings of the afore- 
said Zionist Congress, which was hidden in the 
" Chief Zionist office, which is situated in 
French territory." 

Such are Professor Nilus's rather contra- 
dictory accounts of the origin of the Protocols. 
Not a very convincing story ! Theodor Hertzl 
is dead ; Sukhotin is dead, and where are the 
signatures of the Zionist representatives of the 
33rd Degree ? 

Turning to the text of the Protocols, and 
comparing it with that of the Geneva Dialogues, 
one is struck by the absence of any effort on the 
part of the plagiarist to conceal his plagiarisms. 
The paraphrasing has been very careless ; 


parts of sentences, whole phrases at times, are 
identical : the development of the thought is 
the same ; there has been no attempt worth 
mentioning to alter the order of the Geneva 
Dialogues. The plagiarist has introduced 
Darwin, Marx, and Nietzsche in one passage in 
order to be " up to date " ; he has given a 
Jewish colour to " Machiavelli's " schemes for 
dictatorship, but he lias utterly failed to con- 
coal his indebtedness to the Geneva Dialogues- 
This gives the impression that the real writer 
of the Protocols, -who does not seem to have 
had anything to do with Nilus and may have 
been some quite unimportant precis writer 
employed by the Court or by the Okhrana, 
was obliged to paraphrase tho original at short 
notice. A proof of Jewish conspiracy was 
required at once as a weapon for the Con- 
servatives against the Liberal elements in 

Mr. X, the discoverer of the plagiarism, 
informs me that the Protocols, shortly after 
their discovery in 1901, four years before their 
publication by Professor Nilus, served a sub- 
sidiary purpose, namely, the first defeat of 
Monsieur Philippe, a French hypnotist and 
thought-reader, who acquired considerable in- 
fluence over the Tsar and the Tsaritsa ats 
the beginning of the present century. The 
Court favourite was disliked by certain great 
personages, and incurred the natural jealousy 
of the monks, thaumaturgists, and similar 
adventurers who hoped to capture the Tsar 
through the Empress in their own interest, or 
in that of various cliques. Philippe was not a 
Jew, but it was easy to represent a Frenchman 
from " that nest of Jewish conspiracy " as a 
Zionist agent. Philippe fell from favour, to 
return to Russia and find himself once more in 
the Court's good graces at a later date. 

But the principal importance of the Protocols 
was their use during the first Russian revolu- 


tion. This revolution was supported by 
the Jewish element in Russia, notably by 
the Jewish Bund. The Okhrana organization 
knew this perfectly well ; it had its Jewish 
and crypto -Jewish agents, one of whom after- 
wards assassinated M. Stolypin ; it was in 
league with the powerful Conservative faction ; 
with its allies it sought to gain the Tsar's ear. 
For many years before the Russian revolution 
of 1905-1906 there had been a tale of a secret 
council of Rabbis who plotted ceaselessly against 
the Orthodox. The publication of the Protocols 
in 1905 certainly came at an opportune 
moment for the Conservatives. It is said by 
some Russians that the manuscript of the Pro- 
tocols was communicated to the Tsar early 
in 1905, and that its communication contributed 
to the fall of the Liberal Prince Sviatopolk- 
Mirski in that year and the subsequent strong 
reactionary movement. However that may 
be, the date and place of publication of Nilus's 
first edition of the Protocols are most significant 
now that we know that the originals which were 
given him were simply paraphrases. 

The following conclusions are, therefore, 
forced upon any reader of the two books who 
has studied Nilus's account of the origin of 
the Protocols and has some acquaintance with 
Russian history in the years preceding the 
revolution of 1905-6 : 

1. The Protocols are largely a paraphrase 
of the book here provisionally called the 
" Geneva Dialogues." 

2. They were designed to foster the belief 
among Russian Conservatives, and especially 
in Court circles, that the prune cause of dis- 
content among the politically minded elements 
in Russia was not the repressive policy of the 
bureaucracy, but a world-wide Jewish con- 
spiracy. They thus served as a weapon against 
the Russian Liberals, who urged the Tsar 


to make certain, concessions to the intelli- 

3. The Protocols were paraphrased very 
hastily and carelessly. 

4. Such portions of the Protocols as were not 
derived from the Geneva Dialogues were 
probably supplied by the Okhrana, which 
organization very possibly obtained them 
from the many Jews it employed to spy on their 

So much for the Protocols. They have done 
harm not so much, in the writer's opinion, by 
arousing anti-Jewish feeling, which is older than 
the Protocols and will persist in all countries 
where there is a Jewish problem until that 
problem is solved ; rather, they have done 
harm by persuading all sorts of mostly well-to- 
do people that every recent manifestation of 
discontent on the part of the poor is an un- 
natural phenomenon, a factitious agitation 
caused by a secret society of Jews. 


Leading Article reprinted from 
of August 18, 1921. 

We publish to-day the last of the articles 
on the so-called " Protocols of the Elders of 
" Zion," from our Constantinople Correspon- 
dent, who has effectively exposed a remark- 
able forgery. We have, of course, no political 
object in making this discovery known. On 
the general aspects of the Jewish problem our 
attitude is known to be impartial, and we have 
no intention of taking sides in those political 
controversies on this question which too fre- 
quently engender excessive passion and obscure 
its real character. In the interests of objective 
truth, however, it was of great importance 
that a legend like that so long connected with 
the " Protocols of the Elders of Zion " should 
be exposed at the earliest possible opportunity. 

Briefly summarized, the facts of this curious 
historical incident are as follows. A Russian 
book, published in 1905 by an official named 
SERGEI NILUS, contained a document described 
as " The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," and 
purported to bo a summary of the proceedings 
of a secret meeting of a Jewish organization 
that was plotting in France to overthrow 
Gentile civilization and establish a Jewish world 
State. The document attracted little atten- 
tion until after the Russian revolution in 1917, 
when the astounding collapse of a great country 
through the action of the Bolshevists and the 
presence of a large number of Jews in the 
Bolshevist ranks caused many to search for 
some simplified explanation of the catastrophe. 
The "Protocols" appeared to provide such an 
explanation, more particularly since the tactics 


of the Bolshevists in many respects resembled 
those advocated in the " Protocols." The 
book was translated into several European 
languages and made the basis for impassioned 
dissertations on an alleged Jewish world peril. 
There was a certain plausibility about this 
thesis that attracted many ; but the authenti- 
city of the " Protocols " was very vigorously 
called in question, and the whole matter was 
shrouded in doubt until our Correspondert 
made his remarkable discovery. A Russian 
in Constantinople, who had bought some books 
from an ex-officer of the Russian Secret Police, 
found among them one in which many passages 
struck him by their resemblance to the 
"Protocols." Our Correspondent,whose attention 
was called to the matter, found on examination 
that the " Protocols " consisted in the main 
of clumsy plagiarisms from this little French 
book, which he has forwarded to us. The 
book had no title-page, but we identified it 
in the British Museum as a political pamphlet 
directed against NAPOLEON III. and published 
in Brussels in 1865 by a French lawyer named 
MAURICE JOLY, and entitled " Dialogue aux 
Enfers entre Machiavel et Montesquieu." 
The book was published anonymously, but 
the author was immediately seized by NAPO- 
LEON'S police and sentenced to a term of im- 
prisonment. A second edition was published 
in Brussels in 1868, with the author's name 
and a note on his imprisonment. 

The author of the " Protocols " simply 
copied from the " Dialogues " a number of 
passages in which MACHIAVELLI is made to 
enunciate the doctrines and tactics of despot- 
ism as they were at that time practised by 
NAPOLEON, and put them into the mouth of an 
imaginary Jewish Elder. There can be little 
doubt that the forgery was perpetrated by some 
member of the Russian Secret Police. NILTTS, 
who may have acted in good faith, declared 


that the manuscript of the " Protocols " had 
been given him by an official named ALEXANDER 
SUKHOTIN, who professed to have received 
it from a woman who had stolen it from an 
Elder of Zion. On the leather back of the copy 
of the " Dialogues " sent us by our Correspon- 
dent we notice the letters A.S., and, seeing that 
the book was bought from an ex-officer of the 
Secret Police, it seems possible that this copy 
belonged at one time to STJKHOTIN, and that it 
was the copy actually used in the compilation 
of the " Protocols." For many years there 
was a close connexion between the Russian 
and the French police, and one of the confis- 
cated copies of JOEY'S book may easily have 
failed into the hands of a Russian agent such 
as RACHKOVSKY, at one time head of the Russian 
Secret Police in Paris, to whom other and more 
clumsy forgeries have been traced and may 
have inspired him to invent a weapon for use 
against Jewish revolutionaries. At any rate, 
the fact of the plagiarism has now been conclu- 
sively established, and the legend may be 
allowed to pass into oblivion. The historical 
interest of the discovery is considerable, though, 
as we have indicated, it does not, in our opinion, 
affect the Jewish problem, which happily, in 
this country, cannot be said to exist in its 
Continental form. 



A 000 047 727 3